[freetds] SQL Server 2005 / 2008 support
sf at 4js.com
Thu Dec 13 12:34:51 EST 2007
Note I did the same process with 0.64 (stable release) without problems.
I am using --with-odbc-nodm because I don't want to use a driver manager.
Adding "/include" to the path does not help with 0.65 dev version.
Sebastien FLAESCH wrote:
> Downloaded "current" version from this link:
> Then I ran:
> ./configure --prefix=/opt3/dbs/tds/0.65 --with-odbc-nodm=/opt3/dbs/uxo/3.0
> (using ODBC headers from unixODBC).
> But could not manage to compile the ODBC driver:
> if gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../../include -I../../include -D_FREETDS_LIBRARY_SOURCE -DTDS_NO_DM -D_REENTRANT -D_THREAD_SAFE -DDEBUG=1 -Wall
> -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wno-long-long -pthread -g -O2 -Wdeclaration-after-statement -MT bsqlodbc.o -MD -MP -MF ".deps/bsqlodbc.Tpo"
> -c -o bsqlodbc.o bsqlodbc.c; \
> then mv -f ".deps/bsqlodbc.Tpo" ".deps/bsqlodbc.Po"; else rm -f ".deps/bsqlodbc.Tpo"; exit 1; fi
> bsqlodbc.c:49:17: sql.h: No such file or directory
> Sebastien FLAESCH wrote:
>> Hi James and thank you for your comments/advices.
>> I understand this is a open source project, no problem.
>> I will try to get the latest dev version from the CVS repository.
>> As a side note I would suggest that someone adds from time to time a news
>> on the web site, last news is from April 2005. By the way the text of the
>> new shows 0.63, but the link to the ANNOUNCE has 0.64 in the text.
>> Best regards.
>> James K. Lowden wrote:
>>> Sebastien FLAESCH wrote:
>>>> My name is Sebastien FLAESCH
>>> Good morning, Sebastien. Pleased to make your acquaintance. Welcome to
>>> the project.
>>>> Understand we do not just write a light driver to let 4gl programmers do
>>>> a few SELECT / INSERT / UPDATE / DELETE statements;
>>> FreeTDS is used extensively in many production environments, be assured.
>>>> - Version is still alpha/beta (0.64) - when you compile FreeTDS you get
>>>> a debug version by default. - No scrollable cursors??? (this is very old
>>>> stuff - now?)
>>>> PLEASE: What are the plans?
>>> There is no plan. When and as we have time, we fix things and add things.
>>> You're welcome to join us. It's a volunteer project, and the best
>>> contributions come from people who want the software to do something it
>>> doesn't already do.
>>>> - There is no official support for SQL Server 2005 / 2008 (only TDS 8.0)
>>> And guess what? There's no official support, full stop. Everything we
>>> know about TDS 7.0 and up is inferred by reverse engineering the TDS
>>> packets. (The only support we get from Microsoft is anti-support. We've
>>> talked to them. They won't provide even documentation. The next time you
>>> read about Microsoft's latest open source marketing blather initiative, do
>>> please bear that simple fact in mind.)
>>> To be clear, we're pretty current. TDS 8.0 *is* for 2005, and 2008 is
>>> still in beta, please. Is there some protocol feature of SQL Server 2005
>>> that you noticed is missing?
>>>> You guys probably know about SQL Server's Native Client that ships with
>>>> SQL Server 9 (2005). This one is supposed to replace the old ODBC driver
>>>> one day, from my understanding. Are they still using TDS with this
>>>> Native Client? => Is TDS going to die?
>>> Cf. http://blogs.msdn.com/dataaccess/archive/2005/04/26/412161.aspx
>>> Every few years, Microsoft plops a New and Improved API out there for
>>> everyone to ooh and ahh at. That lets them and their groupies declare
>>> they've once again made the world safe for programming.
>>> But TDS itself is a franchise. It's 20 years old. It works with probably
>>> millions of clients and servers. It's very efficient, possibly the best
>>> remote database protocol on the planet. (Yes, it has warts. Show me
>>> software without warts and I'll show you a textbook.) How in the world --
>>> and why? -- would Microsoft damage its advantage? It's one thing to say,
>>> "Use .NET and be cool", and something else to say that old clients can't
>>> connect to new servers or vice versa. Especially because *TDS* isn't a
>>> feature most people even know about, and would be devilishly hard to
>>> improve on.
>>> As Acey J. Bunch says above,
>>> "It is new in that this data access library did not exist prior to SQL
>>> Server 2005, but rest assured that it is not some radical new design for
>>> accessing data!"
>>> I think we can say TDS is safe for another day.
>>> Regarding the issues you raised. As you can tell from Frediano's response
>>> (and I hope from the email archives) we take bug reports seriously. But
>>> please remember we'll work with you, not for you. The more you do to
>>> correct/isolate a problem, the sooner it will be fixed. Suggestions,
>>> ordered by decreasing helpfulness:
>>> 1. Use the latest snapshot. That's where any fixes/additions will be
>>> 2. Send a patch.
>>> 3. Add a unit test illustrating the problem.
>>> 4. Describe the problem in terms of the source code. "Function X on
>>> lines Y-Z overwrites foo without adjusting the length in bar" can be a
>>> good place to start.
>>> 5. Include a TDSDUMP trace. That shows us the packet sequence and
>>> calling sequence.
>>> Sebastien, I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship.
>>> FreeTDS mailing list
>>> FreeTDS at lists.ibiblio.org
>> FreeTDS mailing list
>> FreeTDS at lists.ibiblio.org
> FreeTDS mailing list
> FreeTDS at lists.ibiblio.org
More information about the FreeTDS